Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The new political divide pits conservatives against liberals and populists
The new political divide pits conservatives against liberals and populists
Dec 19, 2025 1:02 PM

The election of 2016 highlighted how politically divided we are as a nation. But the dividing line may not be where we had assumed.

For the past few decades the electorate has been viewed as divided almost equally between social and economic conservatives and social and economic liberals. But a recent study of voting patterns in the 2016 election reveals the old left-right divide is fractured and voters are clustered into four main groups.

The first group prised of Liberals, who are liberal on both economic and identity issues. At 44.6 percent, prise the largest voting demographic.

The second group is made up of Populists, people who are liberal on economic issues and conservative on identity issues. They are 28.9 percent of the population.

The third group is Conservatives, those who are conservative on both economic and identity issues. They are not only much smaller than the Liberals but even smaller than the Populists, making up only 22.7 percent of voters.

Finally, there are the Libertarians, who are conservative on economic issues and liberal on identity issues. prise a mere 3.8 percent of voters.

This scatterplot below shows how these groups aligned in the 2016 electorate.

Not surprisingly, Clinton voters are consistently liberal on both economic and identity issues. But notice that Trump voters are less conservative on identity issues than Clinton voters are liberal. And while Trump voters are clustered around the center-right on economic issues, few are strongly conservative on economics—and many are economically liberal.

Clinton won the majority of Liberals, while Trump won almost all of the Conservatives. But Trump also won 6.3 percent of the Liberal vote and gained the edge in winning over the Populists. Trump beat Clinton by about a 3-to-1 margin among the populists. Clinton won only 5.7 percent of the Populist vote, barely beating out the 4.3 percent of populists who supported third party candidates.

(Libertarians split almost equally between Clinton, Trump, and third party candidates like Johnson, proving that Liberaltarians do exist.)

So how did Trump win? As the report notes, largely by winning over the Populists—liberal on economic issues, conservative on identity issues—who had previously voted for Obama (about 8 percent of Populists had voted for Obama in 2012) or who had supported neither Obama nor Romney in 2012.

He also resonated with those who supported economically liberal positions—which now is the majority of the Republican party. If we look at primary voters, we find that Republicans—even Ted Cruz voters—were to the left of Clinton voters on attitudes about foreign trade. Trump voters were also to the left of every candidate but Kasich on economic inequality.

What does this portend for the GOP? As the report notes,

Republicans are about equally divided between economically liberal populists and more free-market-oriented conservatives. Republican primaries revealed a Kasich faction that is consistently more moderate across issues, a Trump faction that is more liberal on economic issues but more conservative on identity issues, and a Cruz faction that is more free market on economic issues and particularly conservative on moral issues.

[…]

Since Republicans have picked up more economically liberal voters (and may continue to do so since there are still some populists who vote for Democrats), it may be harder for Republicans to continue to push a traditional conservative free-market agenda.

As these results show, free market advocates pletely e in the Democratic Party and increasingly ing a minority within the GOP. If we don’t find a way to shift the tide soon we advocates of economic freedom may find ourselves caught between Populist and Liberals as they fight about what sort of socialism we’ll be forced to accept.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
How would Jeremy Corbyn change the UK?
American observers may know that Jeremy Corbyn wishes to fundamentally transform the British economy and reshape the special relationship between the U.S. and the UK. “Is it moral to confiscate people’s property and deny the elderly the right to control their own property?” asks Rev. Richard Turnbull, as he explores Corbyn’s economic proposals, from providing “free” services to the full nationalization of whole industries. For instance, Corbyn’s economic plan would destroy £367 billion of stock wealth. Turnbull – the director...
Acton Line podcast: Elizabeth Warren wants $3 trillion tax hike; Mark Hall on America’s Christian founding
Massachusetts Democratic Senator and presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has proposed to increase taxes for big businesses and high earners to rake in nearly $3 trillion per year. Warren plans to use this tax to fund spending in health care, education, and family benefits, and as a result, according to Warren, the economy would grow. Are economists in agreement with Warren? What would increased taxes on the wealthy do for the economy? Dave Hebert, professor of economics and director of the...
An encyclical on China and the US?
Sen. Marco Rubio’s recent speech on capitalism and mon good, taking its point of departure in Rerum Novarum, has gotten a good bit of coverage. Yesterday he delivered remarks at the National Defense University and opened with these words: This morning I am honored to speak here at the National Defense University to discuss the defining geopolitical relationship of this century: the one between the United States and China. Unfortunately, I was unable to find a papal encyclical on this...
Video: David Hebert on how ice got to India
The 2019 Acton Lecture Series wrapped up last week Thursday with a lecture by David Hebert,assistant professor of economics and director of the Center for Markets, Ethics, and Entrepreneurship at Aquinas College. Hebert told the story of Frederick Tudor, a Boston entrepreneur who in the early 1800s set about finding a way to transport ice to Cuba, believing that given the opportunity, Cubans would pay handsomely for the resource. It wasn’t easy, but in the end he was right, and...
Wilhelm Röpke on liberalism and Catholic social teaching
This week’s Acton Commentary, adapted from my preface to the newest Acton Institute publication The Humane Economist: A Wilhelm Röpke Reader, illustrates what makes Röpke such an interesting and vital economist: Röpke saw his project in holistic terms involving intersecting and interdependent spheres or orden that to be fully appreciated and understood scientifically must be examined in their economic, social, and moral dimensions. mitments to mainline economic analysis, the importance of social institutions, and the moral and religious framework of...
Trade war hits home: How tariffs disrupt American businesses
Despite the “America-first” claims of trade protectionists and economic nationalists, we continue to see the ill effects of the Trump administration’s recent wave of tariffs—particularly among American businesses, workers, and consumers. Alas, while such controls may serve to temporarily benefit a select number of businesses or industries, they are just as likely to distort and contort any number of other fruitful relationships and creative partnerships across the economic order—at home, abroad, and everywhere in between. In a recent article for...
Hugo Chavez and Jack London on why socialism kills
In an emotional story in the January 2020 issue of Reason, Jose Cordiero relays how “socialism killed my father” – through economic scarcity. His article highlights the life-and-death stakes of wealth creation. Cordiero writes that he was working in Silicon Valley when he got a call that his father had experienced kidney failure in Caracas. Yet even traveling to Bolivarian Venezuela became virtually impossible. The economic collapse ushered in by Hugo Chavez’s socialist policies dried up demand: Indeed, the number...
Jeremy Corbyn would destroy the US-UK special relationship
Citizens across the UK are casting their votes in the 2019 general election. Jeremy Corbyn “seems in equal parts blind to the violence of socialism, the goodness of the West, and anti-Semitism in his own party,” I write in my new article for The American Spectator. The voters’ decision will have a decisive impact on the United States and the West as a whole. The Labour Party leader would destroy the special relationship of the U.S. and the UK. After...
The Virtue of Liberalism
Today, Law & Liberty published the text of my lecture for the Philadelphia Society in October: “Why Economic Nationalism Fails.” The topic for the panel was “Conservatism and the Coming Economy.” Since I’m not a determinist and doubt my own powers of prediction, I focused on what political economy conservatives ought to support in the future, despite worrying trends in the present: Conservatives ought to reaffirm the good of economic liberty, both domestically and internationally. Free markets and free trade,...
A bait and switch at Peter’s Pence?
The Wall Street Journal’s recent article on the Vatican’s main charitable appeal landed like a bombshell this week. And it didn’t help that we’re in the midst of the holiday giving season. The Roman Catholic Church conducts an annual collection known as Peter’s Pence, which is touted as supporting mercy ministries and serving those most in need. Shockingly, the Journal has reported that for at least the last five years “as little as 10%” of the approximately $55 million raised...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved